Page 24 of 49

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:42 am
by Sounder
What Jack, LO and BS said.

It is bad form to question mod activity and complainers often seem to be people that are a bit too full of themselves.

Like BS, I could never even imagine to send an alert.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:45 am
by seemslikeadream
Elvis JackRiddler Rory MacCruiskeen Belligerent Savant liminalOyster thank you for your suggestions from here on out maybe we can all try to get along ...you ALL were in the thread linked below maybe you could have made your suggestions when this happened.....but alas

over 25 disruptive off topic replies posted in my thread by 5 different members ....first up to bat was Elvis setting the tone for others to follow JackRiddler Rory MacCruiskeen Belligerent Savant....sorry Elvis I did not find your post amusing I thought it was really disrespectful and off topic...but I am the only disrespectful one here....I guess I am the only sensitive one here ....but rules are always doled out fairly here correct? you did repeatedly warn people to stay on topic but when your requests went unheeded nothing happened to the repeat offenders...they just kept on because there was no real consequence for them...like being put in a corner

not one person was given a time out not one person was sent to the corner and the only person to be run off this place was my good friend 2012 Countdown who will never come back here because of the bullies in this thread who's only crime was being my friend ..not one person was even chastised for their personal attacks that ran him off

when someone "misunderstood" what 2012 Countdown said was just a silly mistake ripe for personal attacks when I "misunderstand" it is a suspendible offense

Elvis
perhaps RI is not the forum for them
:roll:

yes liminalOyster you were there you saw it all but I am the only egregious one correct?...I'm the reason that new rules need to be acquired?

liminalOyster
This right here is the pith essence of the most basic (and "non-partisan") caveat that direly needs to be appended to this board's rules.


this is not ancient history ..it is only the latest .....a month ago
10 Pipe Bombs Sent to Prominent Democrats, Trump critics
Postby seemslikeadream » Thu Oct 25, 2018 5:55 am
http://rigorousintuition.ca/board2/view ... =8&t=41377



as to BS's suggestion that 3 sources should be flagged here I believe ever single member here has the right to their own flagged list.....that could end up being at least 30 flagged sources what could be wrong with that?

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:13 pm
by Belligerent Savant
.

In an effort to minimize another round of flare-ups, allow me to provide additional context to a comment I posted that may have inspired much of this recent activity:


Belligerent Savant » Sat Nov 24, 2018 1:22 pm wrote:
JackRiddler » Thu Nov 22, 2018 11:21 pm wrote:.

Elvis, your first 22 Nov post -- phenomenal work by Ames exposing Bellingcat.

Also, grateful to you for reproducing all those graphics here.

.


Agreed. Ames' piece should not be surprising for anyone critically analyzing these events in the last ~2yrs.

While we may offer the benefit of the doubt that the historical citing/pasting (with minimal/no disclaimers, context, or caveats) of content from these hacks were inserted into RI threads, however ill-informed, as a means to offer a 'perspective' of events as they unfolded, I'd suggest that moving forward, ANY content by the following vermin should be flagged here as Blatant PROPAGANDA moving forward:

Bellingcat/Eliot Higgins
Michael Weiss
Aaron Zelin
Atlantic Council

They -- and others of their ilk -- are willing tools in the dissemination of mis/disinformation, with devastating consequences to the lives of many.


The use of the term 'vermin', however apt in most instances when applied to the above 'authors', is a charged term I should have avoided.

Also, usage of the term "flagged" in the above quote should be interpreted as: content by the above-named authors should be readily identified, and properly contextualized, by the RI 'braintrust', given our -- generally astute -- ability to discern propaganda in mainstream media, and our -- general -- propensity for due diligence when sharing sources in this forum. We should not be posting this stuff at face-value. (this is, clearly, simply my own opinion)

After my quoted comment above, JR followed in part:

JRiddler: They may be assholes, liars, paid liars, self-interested liars, regime propagandists barely under cover, all that, but let's avoid the dehumanizing words and their historical evocations.


And he's right.

I'll add this last bit, a recent response from Elvis in the "Nothing is Real" thread, as it better encapsulates the essence of my earlier rhetoric:

Elvis » Mon Nov 26, 2018 9:05 pm wrote: I'm not asserting that "CNN=neoliberal=fascist=violation of RI rules" but am actually questioning that equation because it's not that simple (as you say). I am just trying to coax people into using some discernment and qualification when habitually posting articles that spread neoliberal philosophies.

To be clear, no one is going to be in trouble with me the moderator for posting or citing CNN (or USA Today or NYTimes or WaPo yada yada), I do it and will do it, but sometimes it clearly calls for context.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:15 pm
by seemslikeadream
there will not be another round of flare-ups....I've said my peace... I've made my clarifications ......I am done with this but thanks for all your clarification now I understand since you cleared that up and added what you say you should have said....I am not a mind reader....let's just chalk this up to a misunderstanding all around ...shall we?

My apologies to everyone...... it will not happen again

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:09 pm
by Cordelia
I can’t think of a reason to send a moderator an alert unless someone posted something alarming, threatening or revealed personal information about another member (w/that in mind, how do you send one?). Certainly not about the usual imbroglios that spring up and are annoying but hardly alert-worthy.

(And btw, who/where is DrViolin? I need a new tailpiece and better tuning.)

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:23 pm
by elfismiles
I miss so much around here . . . I admittedly spend less and less time posting and reading here, but I like to think its the kind of place I'll keep returning to so long as I get SOMETHING out of the community.

I have never understood the vitriol that some spew, that just keeps the spitball rolling and growing.

Hope all parties can move forward.

I've learned heaps from most of y'all here.

Peace out!

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:28 pm
by Elvis
Welcome back SLAD :hug1:

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 3:44 pm
by Elvis
Commuting AD's suspension, to end Nov. 30. I've asked a mutual correspondent to let AD know.

I'll need to manually lift the suspension on the 30th, so if I get busy and forget, someone please prod me.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:58 pm
by Belligerent Savant
seemslikeadream » Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:15 am wrote:there will not be another round of flare-ups....I've said my peace... I've made my clarifications ......I am done with this but thanks for all your clarification now I understand since you cleared that up and added what you say you should have said....I am not a mind reader....let's just chalk this up to a misunderstanding all around ...shall we?

My apologies to everyone...... it will not happen again


One suggestion, which may be helpful moving forward.

You mention you're 'not a mind reader'; the same applies to the rest of us.

If you're not certain of intent, ask for clarity rather than starting from a defensive position. It'll help minimize recurrence of these incidents.

This applies to all of us.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:36 pm
by MacCruiskeen
[Deleted on edit: A stupid question by me about some posts I thought had vanished.]

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 5:09 pm
by Elvis
Do you recall when the posts were made? Post deletions, by members or moderators, are all recorded in the moderator log, and I found only the seven deletions in four Assange-related threads, all deleted by their authors, as mentioned in my earlier reply.

Is it possible the posts you remember are in other threads tangentially related to Wikileaks?

When I couldn't find a post I was sure existed, I've used Google to search RI (adding "site:rigorousintuition.ca" to the search terms) to find them; works much better than the board's integral search function.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2018 6:07 pm
by MacCruiskeen
Problem solved, Elvis. My stupid fault. Thanks, and apologies for wasting your time.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:56 am
by MacCruiskeen
Posting this here where it belongs, so as to avoid yet another round in yet another soul-destroying thread. Never again. Life's too short.

MacCruiskeen » Fri Dec 07, 2018 2:46 pm wrote:
seemslikeadream » Fri Dec 07, 2018 8:00 am wrote:This is a discussion board with an ignore feature which was put in place for a reason. It is within a member’s right to utilize it. It is a very important function. It increases board comity by decreasing unwanted exchanges. It increases courtesy and considerate behavior towards others. It’s purpose is to resolve most of the hostility. I guess it might be scary for someone to simply stop acknowledging another member’s existence but we all have our crosses to bear.


No member can demand that they be taken off another member’s ignore list thus no member can demand that another member answer a question posed to them. Members are not obligated to respond to a foe. Using the Ignore Feature more often would make the job of the one mod we have left a bit easier.

It is a good feature one that I should take advantage of more often.


....and there is no limit on the number of foes one can have......the infinite wisdom of the creator :yay


You completely missed the point, as usual. American Dream does not have me "on ignore", as he has just demonstrated. He simply ignores (or pretends to ignore) every poster who does not agree with him, or suck up to him, or endure his propaganda barrage without demurral or dissent.

One last time:

American Dream grossly misuses this Discussion Board as his own personal set of Private Data Dumps, as do you.

And then American Dream fills those multiple Private Data Dumps with truckloads of unfiltered reactionary warmongering propaganda from any mercenary corporate-media pundit with a pulpit, as do you.

And then American Dream refuses to explain or justify a single word of the stuff he regurgitates here, as do you. ("I didn't say it, I just posted it. I'm not responsible. I don't necessarily agree with it. But I might.")

And if anyone posting to this Discussion Board in good faith persists, even politely, in questioning such incessant gross misuses of this Discussion Board, then American Dream claims, ridiculously, that he is being bullied, as do you.

In the two-and-a-half years since the Great Trump Derangement began, the two of you have very nearly succeeded in killing this Discussion Board off. You haven't succeeded. Not quite. Not yet.

Please note: I have avoided addressing either of you for nearly the entirety of the last year, and I did not address you here. But you have made a point of addressing me here. So I am responding to you, politely, here. I have no obligation to respond to everything you assert or regurgitate here (an impossible task, in any case), but I do have a right to respond, to you, or to him or to any other poster. Because this is a Discussion Board.

Finally: I will tell you one strong personal reason why I object very vehemently to your ongoing irresponsible antics and to American Dream's: I live a hell of a lot closer to the Russian border than either of you do or ever will. Your American Dream will be Europe's nightmare. When you finally get the hot war with Russia you and he and Keith Olbermann and the CIA have been pushing for since no later than 2016, then I and my friends and family are going to feel the actual physical effects of that hot war much sooner and much more painfully than either of you ever will. (You will be "experiencing" it in exactly the same way you "experience" all of America's wars: on the telly, as a Spectacle, mediated by some mercenary corporate-media hack, such as Anderson Cooper.)

And that is to say nothing of my family in the UK, most of whom, including several young kids, live even closer (much closer) to Faslane than I do to the Russian border. That naval base will be a prime target, for very obvious reasons, should the New Cold War turn suddenly hot.

Image
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/23/snp-raises-safety-concerns-about-cuts-at-trident-naval-base#img-1



Enough.

_________

I'm going to copy and paste this post to the sticky thread "Rhetoric and the Art of Collaborative Discussion", because I have taken some time and trouble over it, I do not want it to sink without trace, and that is certainly the right thread for it. I want it there for reference, as something that can be linked to, if and whenever necessary. I will not waste one more second stating and re-stating what has been blatantly obvious to practically everyone here for years. It's also the thread where these incessant disingenuous complaints of "bullying" can be properly addressed and recognised for what they are. In the last few days alone, I've seen that preposterous accusation trotted out at least four times by three posters I need not name to you, because you know exactly who they are. This is not a playground. This is a Discussion Board.

Image
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/shutterstock_shutterstock_251930719.jpg

Enough is really enough.

Over and out.

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:33 am
by seemslikeadream
And then American Dream fills those multiple Private Data Dumps with truckloads of unfiltered reactionary warmongering propaganda from any mercenary corporate-media pundit with a pulpit, as do you.



I do not post warmongering propaganda



In 14 years I have never been warned by any of the 7 mods that would include Jeff of posting warmongering propaganda

Please stop

Re: Rhetoric and the art of Collaborative Discussion

PostPosted: Sat Dec 08, 2018 3:37 pm
by Belligerent Savant
.
Unintentionally, perhaps, but YES: much of the copy/paste articles you've been sharing here over the last 2+ years is indeed propaganda, warmongering or otherwise.

Likewise for AD, needless to say, but his penchant goes back much farther.

This is completely correctible, but the first step is acknowledgement.

Belligerent Savant » Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:56 pm wrote:.

[…]

Certain members here have pasted content/articles by authors known to spread disinformation. Fact.

One can:

1. Avoid posting content by authors known to spread disinfo.
2. Apply appropriate disclaimers/caveats/context along with the posting.
3. Continue to paste such content here, as they have, but with the added awareness that others may call out the content as disinfo.